RVM Inc. Litigation Support | eDiscovery

eDiscovery, e-Discovery or Electronic Discovery?

S2R Solutions, LLC — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 19:18:15 +0000

What’s in a name?

In the world of Litigation Support, we often find ourselves searching for the latest news and information via the World Wide Web. Ironically, in the field of Electronic Discovery our access to information varies with the way our industry describes this service.

When using Google to research eDiscovery, e-Discovery or Electronic Discovery, the search results are dramatically different. As of this posting; eDiscovery yields about 2,190,000 results, e-discovery yields 52,000,000 results, and electronic discovery holds 8,360,000 results.

This fact alone demonstrates the importance of dealing with professionals that have the expertise and technology to transform essential data, regardless of it’s original format or description, into usable information. Just as with Google, key information regarding your case may be hidden away simply because of it’s terminology. Given the wide array of people involved in this form of Litigation Support (forensic investigators, lawyers and IT professionals), the use of a common terminology is imperative.

RVM’s electronic discovery services help our clients quickly, cost effectively and accurately winnow down electronic data to the most relevant, responsive and accessible evidence.

RVM provides legal technology consulting, data forensics and litigation support services. Its team of experts, including industry savvy consultants, top-flight project managers and seasoned support personnel, assist law firms and corporations with their most demanding discovery and e-data processing assignments. Paired with its proprietary e-data processing software, RVM delivers consistent, repeatable, and defensible results on time and under budget. Visit http://www.rvminc.com for details.

Fraud and Identity Theft: The Legal View Seminar Signature Bank (CLE)

S2R Solutions, LLC — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:27:02 +0000

View this on RVM Inc, website

During this informative CLE- approved seminar, the following 3 topics will be covered:

Federal Trade Commission and the “Red Flags Rule”: Does your business have to comply? What do you need to do?
Social Networking and Business Policies
Identity Theft: Prevention and Proactive Action, not Reaction

Speakers:

Amy B. Goldsmith, Principal, Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman, PC.
Greg Cancilla, EnCE, Director of Forensics, RVM Inc.
Steve Kluger, Director, Enterprise Solutions, Ursus Networking & Consulting, LLC

Speaker Biographies:

Amy B. Goldsmith’s practice includes litigation, licensing and prosecution of patents, trademarks and copyrights around the world. She protects the global interests of both national and international clients in a variety of industries, including pet products, telecommunications, publishing, medical devices, green tech, and consumer and designer goods such as jewelry, handbags, eyewear, and apparel. She has a specialized background in genetics and is a member of the New York City, New York Women’s Bar Association and American Bar associations. Ms. Goldsmith is a frequent lecturer on intellectual property topics for Lawline.com and at industry associations.

Greg Cancilla is a Certified Computer Forensic Engineer and the Director of Forensics at RVM, Inc. He is experienced in the preservation, identification, extraction, documentation and interpretation of computer data using computer forensic tools. He has completed computer forensics training programs conducted by New Technologies Inc., Access Data, and Guidance Software, the developers of Encase Forensics Software, among others. As a certified forensic engineer, he has performed countless computer forensics investigations since his inception into the field in 2003. Additionally, Mr. Cancilla has offered testimony on numerous occasions, including presenting a key piece of evidence in Ronald Luri v Republic Services, Inc., et al., which rendered the largest verdict in the State of Ohio history.

Steve Kluger is at the cutting edge of Information Technology. He is a prime developer of fail safe, self correcting systems for small to mid market companies whose businesses depend on their information systems never failing. A thought leader in the field, Mr. Kluger shares his expertise by addressing busi- ness organizations and as a participant in various think tanks.

**Worth 1 CLE Credit for Attorneys

Computer Forensics, Data Recovery and eDiscovery Differ

S2R Solutions, LLC — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 23:00:13 +0000

What’s the difference between data recovery, computer forensics and eDiscovery?

A Closer Look at Forensic Collection NY

S2R Solutions, LLC — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:34:17 +0000

A Closer Look at “Forensic Collection”

From time to time, you get asked a question so many times that it makes sense to just go find the answer. If only it were that easy, but I’m going to try. Lately, I’ve been asked about the need for forensic collection a lot. Organizations want to know how forensic collection fits into their overall information governance strategies. After all, why invest in an infrastructure to optimize eDiscovery when you’ll just have to image all custodians’ machines anyway? We’ve discussed some of the issues around this, especially forensic collection of Sharepoint information in previous posts. eDiscoveryJournal will be producing a report on the role of forensic collection in information governance strategies later this month, but we wanted to give you some of our thinking in the meantime – as well as ask for your feedback and any experiential contributions you might have.

Let’s first talk about the definition of “forensic collection.” According to Nolo, forensics “refers to the use of science or technology to discover evidence for a court of law.” For the eDiscovery market, the term “forensic collection” is about the combination of people, processes, and technology to defensibly collect information in response to an investigation. In the early days of digital information (before organizations really tried to actually manage the information), products arose that could forensically capture information from computers. These products capture bit-by-bit copies of computer drives (known as disk imaging). The term forensics came to be virtually synonymous with disk imaging.

As systems for better managing information became available, the need for disk imaging started to diminish. What organizations learned was that a full copy of a custodian’s machine was not always required for civil litigation. No one wanted to pay to process full disk images when they could filter that information down to the relevant 1GB or 2GB (at 2005 processing prices of $2K / GB, that savings amounted to $36K / custodian for 20GB hard drives – pretty good savings, especially when you consider that cases could routinely have over 10 custodians). At the same time, consultants were telling organizations that it was safer to take full disk images for collection than risk not finding all potentially relevant information via other collection mechanisms. This advice was not necessarily untrue, but it was at the very least biased – these consultants were typically from the EDD processing provider and wanted to increase revenue with more high-priced processing. But, the point of the consultants stood – it is safer to take a full disk image if you don’t think other collection mechanisms will be able to get all the information necessary.

A “forensic collection,” then, is really a defensible collection – one that will stand up to rigorous questioning in court. Many collection tools can run a defensible collection by ensuring that all files and associated metadata don’t change. This brings us back to metadata and the challenges it presents for eDiscovery. To look more at how the courts view metadata, I turned to a colleague, John Patzakis – the founder of Digital Compliance Consulting, Inc. and former Chief Legal Officer at Guidance Software. John pointed me to Aguilar v. Immigration & Customs Enforcement Div. of U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 255 F.R.D. 350 (S.D.N.Y. 2008), a case that stated that metadata is no different than other forms of ESI and “thus is discoverable if it is relevant to the claim or defense of any party and is not privileged.” In addition, this case provided a good explanation of the different types of metadata, dividing it into three categories: substantive metadata (e.g., data reflecting “modifications to a document, such as prior edits or editorial comments, and data that instructs the computer how to display the fonts and spacing in a document”), system metadata (e.g., “the author, date and time of creation, and the date a document was modified”), and embedded metadata (e.g., “spreadsheet formulas, hidden columns, externally or internally linked files (such as sound files), hyperlinks, references and fields, and database information”). As Patzakis pointed out to me, “a defensible collection will include logging, reporting, and hashing where an organization shows it was able to get the metadata, log the search criteria, have transparency in the collection and preservation process.”

The next question that comes up, then, is really about where full bit-by-bit forensic collection fits in. Even with this case, organizations are left wonder how to fit full forensic collection into information governance strategies. Here is what we’re learning so far:

Forensic collection does not always mean disk imaging. A good forensic collection is defensible and includes all the files and necessary metadata necessary to prove how, where, when, and why the information was collected.
Full disk imaging does play a role in information governance strategies. There will be times when a full disk images is required:
- If criminal activity is suspected
- If custodians might be non-cooperative
- If the investigation is internal or due to regulatory requests
- If the organizations believes that other collection mechanisms will likely miss information

The key with disk imaging is to understand that it can be overkill while recognizing that there will be times when it’s required. As organizations plan to build out infrastructures that optimize eDiscovery, it’s important that disk imaging not be a killer should it come up. Rather, it should be integrated into the process so that potentially responsive information can be extracted from the images and then analyzed and reviewed alongside other information.

source: ediscoveryjournal.com

eDiscovery Helps Law Firms Become More Productive

S2R Solutions, LLC — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 20:55:53 +0000

The electronic medium has unfolded a spectrum of opportunities for the legal domain. However, conventional methods have proven to be more of a hindrance as law firms were unable to supply relevant evidence on time. Tools they employed often resulted in erroneous summations that negatively impacted trials. Due to the absence of an efficient integrating system, early case assessments were challenging and often ineffective. Unsystematic process drops the efficiency level.

The legal system is divided into various tiers, and verdicts are not delivered in a matter of minutes or hours. It can take days to evaluate one case before a judgment is given. The system is time consuming and tedious, and he legal process does not end here. If the defendant or the opposing parties are unhappy with the court’s decision they can appeal for a review to a higher court and see the same process repeated.

When a lawsuit is filed, organizations employ law firms to assess the gravity of the situation and set to task collecting all evidence to turn the scales in their favor. It is a daunting task when cases are tried at higher levels, entailing much more laborious work as the attorneys must gather additional information from the previous trial. Added expenditures and longer hours are incurred trying to find relevant documents and other proof from the previous trial.

To ease the burden of ediscovery on law firms, solutions with flexible, integrating features are provided to help attorneys work smarter. Lawyers no longer need to spend their time examining largely irrelevant data. The features provided help search, cull and filter data early, allowing for early case assessment. Any amount of information can be handled easily, giving an extra advantage to law firms and enabling them to prepare strong cases for their clients.

How can the productivity of law firms help the corporate world?

1.The best ediscovery tools use a single application to search, cull and analyze data so the investigation process can commence as soon as possible. With these hard facts derived, lawyers have a better idea of the standing of a case sooner.

2.The best ediscovery solution has a highly beneficial automatic data filtering system that filters data by file type, date and size, amongst other characteristics such as sender and recipient

3.Corporate communication consists of various forms of information, including emails, files, discussions, etc. The best ediscovery tool helps the legal team analyze and link the data along with the content, such as emails, replies, added comments, etc., to come to a conclusion.

4.Because of its fast working system, the best ediscovery tools helps locate necessary evidence easily through a transparent search capability. These tools have a knack for providing exact results from keyword searches conducted and promptly submit a concise report.

5.The best Ediscovery solutions can help the legal team detect secret codes or project names that can be useful in finding evidence for the trial.

Law firms face reprimand if they are unable to deliver results, which can be damaging to a reputation. Lawsuits can be quite taxing, and an insufficient support system can spell doom for any case. That’s why the decision to use an enterprise –class, top rated ediscovery tool is a wise one that can be gauged by performance and productivity.

About Author http://www.clearwellsystems.com

RVM, Inc is now Safe Harbor Certified

S2R Solutions, LLC — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 00:21:29 +0000

RVM, Inc is now Safe Harbor Certified

RVM,Inc has achieved US-EU Safe Harbor certification status from the US Department of Commerce The Safe Harbor certification demonstrates RVM’s effort and ability to deal with European data in the appropriate manner as outlined by the EU

PRLog (Press Release) – Aug 03, 2010 – RVM announces that it has achieved US-EU Safe Harbor certification status from the US Department of Commerce The Safe Harbor certification demonstrates RVM’s effort and ability to deal with European data in the appropriate manner as outlined by the EU.

Safe Harbor Certification is particularly important to RVM’s clients who engage RVM for data collection, electronic data processing, and online hosting services. RVM is now automatically approved for trans-border data transfers.

RVM’s published data privacy policy complies with the seven Safe Harbor principles: notes, choice, transfers to third parties, access, security, data integrity, and enforcement.

“RVM has grown tremendously over the past year. Obtaining more and more certifications to demonstrate RVM’s commitment to quality service and ability to manage complex (international) data types was naturally the next move. And now our clients can work with RVM and their European data smoothly, without worrying about data privacy,” say RVM’s CEO, Vincent Brunetti.

About RVM

RVM provides holistic legal technology consulting, data forensics and litigation support services. RVM’s team of experts, including industry savvy consultants, top-flight project managers and seasoned support personnel can assist you with your most demanding discovery and e-data processing assignments. RVM’s proprietary e-data processing software delivers consistent, repeatable, and defensible results on time and under budget.
To learn more about RVM, call 1-800-525-7915 or visit http://www.rvminc.com. To learn more about RVM’s Safe Harbor Privacy Policy, visit http://www.rvminc.com/home/safe-harbor-privacy-policy/.

About Safe Harbor Certification

To learn more about the US-EU Safe Harbor Certification, please visithttp://www.export.gov/safeharbor/index.asp

RVM, INC Sponsors CBS2 Chicago TV Series “unSpoken: The Things We Don’t Say”

S2R Solutions, LLC — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 20:08:15 +0000

PRLog (Press Release) – Jul 31, 2010 – The series is hosted by Vic Henderson, managing partner of Holland & Knight. Every Sunday, he leads an unscripted topical discussion that focuses on Chicago’s African American community and exposes cultural issues rarely discussed in public. The show is an experimental 5-week series, beginning Sunday July 18th and ending on Sunday, August 15th. The show is schedules o air at 10 Am CST, immediately following “Face The Nation”. The next air date is Sunday, August 1st at 10 am CST.

Through this partnership with Mr. Henderson and CBS2, RVM, Inc hopes to provide an outlet for the people of Chicago to discuss what is most important to them. Vincent Brunetti, CEO of RVM, stated, “RVM appreciates the opportunity to participate in the admirable endeavor. RVM is also honored to take on an endeavor led by Vic Henderson, a well-respected litigator and community leader of Chicago.”

RVM Bolstering Boutique Law Firms

S2R Solutions, LLC — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:35:51 +0000

Small boutique law firms have not escaped the wrath of e-discovery. Judges expect all attorneys from the top AmLaw list to solo practitioners to do their due diligence for e-discovery. Yet small firms remain overlooked and under-served by the vendor community. In this competitive market, e-discovery vendors have instead turned most of their attention to big law firms, hoping to land the next mega case. At RVM, we like to tread in a different path from the masses. We understand the challenges faced by smaller law firms that do not have the dedicated litigation support and IT resources to navigate the e-discovery mine field. We understand that the needs and concerns of smaller law firms may not be the same as the big law firms. RVM’s team of expert consultants is adept at bridging the gap between the complex technologies that are often associated with eDiscovery, and the non-technical legal professionals who need to review the data. Our professional Services team has been engaged to assist in every facet of the Discovery process, bringing advanced technologies from our arsenal such as EnCase, FTK, ClearWell and Relativity among others, to the reaches of those small firms that would otherwise have been excluded due to their limited resources. By working hand-in-hand with our smaller legal and commercial clients, RVM has developed a trusted partnership with them, which has resulted in our becoming their go-to advisors for any technology concerns. If your small law firm needs help, call RVM and let us show you the difference that we can make.

Posted via email from RVM Inc

Native Processing of Lotus Notes Data

S2R Solutions, LLC — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:26:06 +0000

RVM has continued to advance its development of native processing of Lotus Notes data. Recently, RVM handled a project involving hundreds of gigabytes of Lotus Notes Mail databases. Due to the large volume of data and the client’s need to review in a native format RVM’s developed a custom solution to meet their needs. Responsive mail messages were funneled into a new subset database while maintaining unique IDs throughout the process. This enabled the client to use existing tools such as Lotus Notes Client which allowed for multiple users to review data that came from the same source. RVM Inc looks forward to future endeavors with the client and seeks new challenges to be presented. Most recently, RVM has upgraded its e-data processing software, Revelation™, to the latest version of Lotus Notes, 8.5. To learn how RVM can help you process and review complex data types like Lotus Notes, please contact info@rvminc.com. Direct link – http://www.rvminc.com/2010/06/23/native-processing-of-lotus-notes/

Posted via email from RVM Inc

RVM, Inc appoints Greg Cancilla as Director of Forensics

S2R Solutions, LLC — Thu, 27 May 2010 14:02:53 +0000

RVM, Inc is pleased to welcome Gregory Cancilla, EnCE as Director of Forensics. RVM provides legal technology consulting, data forensics and litigation support to law firms and corporate clients. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE PR Log (Press Release) – May 27, 2010 – RVM’s forensic practice focuses on computer forensics, electronic data harvesting, data recovery, electronic data discovery, network security and the development of custom applications and solutions. RVM’s client base includes United States and international law firms and companies. Mr. Cancilla is a Certified Computer Forensic Engineer and the Director of Forensics at RVM. He is experienced in the preservation, identification, extraction, documentation and interpretation of computer data using computer forensic tools. He has completed computer forensics training programs conducted by New Technologies Inc., Access Data, and Guidance Software, the developers of Encase Forensics Software, among others. As a certified forensic engineer, he has performed countless computer forensics investigations since his inception into the field in 2003. Additionally, Mr. Cancilla has offered testimony on numerous occasions, including presenting a key piece of evidence in Ronald Luri v Republic Services, Inc., et al., which rendered the largest verdict in the State of Ohio history. Computer forensics is the review of electronically stored information by highly trained individuals, in order to reconstruct a series of events that happened in the past. RVM handles computer forensic projects that range from analyzing individual computer systems, to pulling data and email off client’s servers. RVM provides legal technology consulting, data forensics and litigation support services. Its team of experts, including industry savvy consultants, top-flight project managers and seasoned support personnel, assist law firms and corporations with their most demanding discovery and e-data processing assignments. Paired with its proprietary e-data processing software, RVM delivers consistent, repeatable, and defensible results on time and under budget. Visit http://www.rvminc.com for details.

Posted via web from RVM Inc